enarees wrote:Absolutely!Canalon and JackBean are the contemporary inquisitors.They keep important secrets for brethrens.

QFT That is why you have been banned to be silenced by those moderators in a blatant show of abuse of power. And we limit the access to the secret database so that the poor uninitiated cannot access scientific evidence that we rely on (and please never look for the bookshelf).

Oh wait.... enarees you are deluded and completely irrelevant when it comes to biology. You might think that you have something of interest to bring to the discussion, but you do not. Yet we do not silence you because your own lack of knowledge, sense, data and relevance is enough to show the world the importance (or lack thereof) of what you have to say.

You are going to make me regret that I am not an inquisitor. I would torture you to death by forcing you to study and educate yourself. I might use books by Dawkins, S.J Gould and Popper. They are full of terrible secrets and in a pile, quite heavy when use to whack the internet trolls into submission.

Patrick

Science has proof without any certainty. Creationists have certainty without
any proof. (Ashley Montague)

What do you make of that?An empty egg is fertilized by one or two sperm and develop in an hydatidiform mole (a non viable pocket of embryonic tissue, not an embryo). They abort it, and its normally fertilized twin. I fail to see what would be quite earth-shattering. Would you care to illuminate us?

And before you tell us that androgenesis is thus proved, then I would point that sperm making an incomplete placenta that abort itself, or eliminated by the doctor, is far from being a conclusive proof that androgenesis is a viable reproductive system, don't you think?

Patrick

Science has proof without any certainty. Creationists have certainty without
any proof. (Ashley Montague)